Go Fund Me pitch for troll-infested website vermin eradication program manual

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > Go Fund Me pitch for troll-infested website vermin eradication program manual

Page 1 of 2

Go Fund Me pitch for troll-infested website vermin eradication program manual19-03-2022 05:06
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	Here is something that anyone reading this could do. I bet it would work. What if someone set up a Go Fund Me account for vermin eradication? I bet a whole lot of people would like to see these unmoderated forums fulfill their potential. What if someone could think of ways to get the word around that there is a troll eradication program instruction manual, and all you have to do is go to climate-debate.com. You don't have to log in and I wouldn't recommend it. There is much to be learned here and valid ideas to be discussed in a rational manner. My personal goal is to make this a valuable resource for humanity. You would almost think a prerequisite to join a site like this would be genuine concern for climate change. I bet maybe one of you out there could quit your job and dedicate your time to this instead. A good pitch and I bet you'll get takers. You wouldn't even need Go Fund Me if all you're doing is get the word out that a revolution is happening at climate-debate.com. Wha
19-03-2022 05:18
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14416)	seal over wrote:My personal goal is to make this a valuable resource for humanity. This is very revealing. You admit that you didn't come here to learn anything or to discuss anything. You admit that you came here to preach your Climate Change religion (the Biogeochemicals sect) and to impose your WACKY dogma of science denial. I bet those rare moments of honesty feel refreshing, eh? Like you are getting a huge weight off your chest. seal over wrote:You would almost think a prerequisite to join a site like this would be genuine concern for climate change. This is very revealing. The prerequisite to participate at Climate-Debate is the genuine desire to discuss/debate Climate-based religious dogma. Again, you only read the first word of the name, i.e. "Climate.". The second word of the name, "Debate" implies discussion/debate, not fundamentalist belief. Your English comprehension is not very good. Attached image:
RE: Are your widdle feewings hurt?19-03-2022 05:43
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	You are the single MOST **ING DISGUSTING PERSON I HAVE EVER MET. Second to none. And I've met some pretty disgusting motherers. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IBdaMann wrote: seal over wrote:*My personal goal is to make this a valuable resource for humanity. This is very revealing. You admit that you didn't come here to learn anything or to discuss anything. You admit that you came here to preach your Climate Change* religion (the Biogeochemicals sect) and to impose your WACKY dogma of science denial. I bet those rare moments of honesty feel refreshing, eh? Like you are getting a huge weight off your chest. seal over wrote:You would almost think a prerequisite to join a site like this would be genuine concern for climate change. This is very revealing. The prerequisite to participate at Climate-Debate is the genuine desire to discuss/debate Climate-based religious dogma. Again, you only read the first word of the name, i.e. "Climate.". The second word of the name, "Debate" implies discussion/debate, not fundamentalist belief. Your English comprehension is not very good.
19-03-2022 08:20
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	sealover wrote: Here is something that anyone reading this could do. I bet it would work. What if someone set up a Go Fund Me account for vermin eradication? Careful, dude. People here get banned for soliciting money. That's pretty much true on any forum. How does money get rid of 'trolls'? Are you trying get rid of yourself by collecting money? sealover wrote: I bet a whole lot of people would like to see these unmoderated forums fulfill their potential. This forum is moderated. sealover wrote: What if someone could think of ways to get the word around that there is a troll eradication program instruction manual, and all you have to do is go to climate-debate.com. You don't have to log in and I wouldn't recommend it. You have a manual on getting rid of yourself? sealover wrote: There is much to be learned here and valid ideas to be discussed in a rational manner. That there is, but not from you. sealover wrote: My personal goal is to make this a valuable resource for humanity. It already is. Too bad you are not contributing to it. sealover wrote: You would almost think a prerequisite to join a site like this would be genuine concern for climate change. Ah. So you asking for blind faith in the Church of Global Warming. How typical. At least you openly admit it. sealover wrote: I bet maybe one of you out there could quit your job and dedicate your time to this instead. A good pitch and I bet you'll get takers. Oh?? Sacrifice all, your career and everything? To support a fundamentalist religion that denies science and mathematics? sealover wrote: You wouldn't even need Go Fund Me if all you're doing is get the word out that a revolution is happening at climate-debate.com. Nah. You're the same old shit that's shown up here before. You are nothing new. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: Not a well moderated forum, no.19-03-2022 09:09
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	"This forum is moderated" - local genius Really? It sure is hard to tell. Would somebody wake up the moderator, if there is one? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Into the Night wrote: sealover wrote: Here is something that anyone reading this could do. I bet it would work. What if someone set up a Go Fund Me account for vermin eradication? Careful, dude. People here get banned for soliciting money. That's pretty much true on any forum. How does money get rid of 'trolls'? Are you trying get rid of yourself by collecting money? sealover wrote: I bet a whole lot of people would like to see these unmoderated forums fulfill their potential. This forum is moderated. sealover wrote: What if someone could think of ways to get the word around that there is a troll eradication program instruction manual, and all you have to do is go to climate-debate.com. You don't have to log in and I wouldn't recommend it. You have a manual on getting rid of yourself? sealover wrote: There is much to be learned here and valid ideas to be discussed in a rational manner. That there is, but not from you. sealover wrote: My personal goal is to make this a valuable resource for humanity. It already is. Too bad you are not contributing to it. sealover wrote: You would almost think a prerequisite to join a site like this would be genuine concern for climate change. Ah. So you asking for blind faith in the Church of Global Warming. How typical. At least you openly admit it. sealover wrote: I bet maybe one of you out there could quit your job and dedicate your time to this instead. A good pitch and I bet you'll get takers. Oh?? Sacrifice all, your career and everything? To support a fundamentalist religion that denies science and mathematics? sealover wrote: You wouldn't even need Go Fund Me if all you're doing is get the word out that a revolution is happening at climate-debate.com. Nah. You're the same old shit that's shown up here before. You are nothing new.

19-03-2022 19:36
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	sealover wrote: "This forum is moderated" - local genius Really? It sure is hard to tell. Would somebody wake up the moderator, if there is one? What do you expect him to do? Ban trolls like you? The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
RE: This isn't the only website where this happens20-03-2022 00:16
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	Many websites have been created with the mission of facilitating discussion of environmental issues. Many of them have been overrun by trolls. Like "Lord of the Flies". There scientific contribution to the discussion is non-existent. What they contribute is heckling and bullying. And it only works because they're good at hurting people. They are good at leaving people so frustrated it becomes personal. If they succeed at finally provoking one small insult, they will have retroactive justification for the 100 vicious personal insults they hurled before. But they put their Achilles on full display with the nature of their insults. They believe you are terrified of being exposed as a fraud. They believe you are terrified of being exposed as ignorant. They believe you are terrified of being exposed as a liar. You have no reason to fear these things. They do.
RE: Two-pronged Approach to Troll Eradication20-03-2022 03:50
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	There is a two-pronged approach to troll eradication. One is to simply by-pass them completely and go to a list of posts that includes none of theirs. You never have to see a word they say, and it starves them out. The second is just to drive them out with humiliation. When pain of humiliation exceeds joy of sadism, they reach a tipping point.
RE: "What do you expect him to do? Ban trolls like you?20-03-2022 04:10
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	"What do you expect him to do? Ban trolls like you?" Thank you! You are making this too easy. You have given me the BEST QUOTE EVER! It rhymes beautifully. What DO I expect him to do. Ban trolls like YOU! Because that one also rhymes so beautifully. Thank you. And apology accepted. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Into the Night wrote: sealover wrote: "This forum is moderated" - local genius Really? It sure is hard to tell. Would somebody wake up the moderator, if there is one? What do you expect him to do? Ban trolls like you?
20-03-2022 05:38
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14416)	sealover wrote:"What do you expect him to do? Ban trolls like you?" I am not seeing any difference between you and trafn. You both are 100% intolerant of posters with differing views and you need them banned. You both have an intense need to thoroughly control all conversations. You both have difficulties with posting. You both hate Branner for not playing the role of your personal censor at the ready. You are both batshit crazy morons who spam this board out of uncontrollable temper tantrums. You were both chemistry students in New York and you both like the word "titration". You both believe that the primary "threat" to the planet is the methane and other gases being released from under the tundra as it melts. Not that any of it matters ... it's just a difference that I am not seeing.
RE: Please Stop! My widdle feewings are hurt20-03-2022 05:48
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	Please stop. My widdle feewings are hurt. Can you please find it in your heart to forgive me? I promise to never again force you to post on my thread, where I subject you to so much disrespect. And you are most worthy of respect, are you not? I'm sorry I just can't be that person who gives you the respect that you so richly deserve. In all sincerity. I want very much for you to get everything that you deserve. IBdaMann wrote: sealover wrote:"What do you expect him to do? Ban trolls like you?" I am not seeing any difference between you and trafn. You both are 100% intolerant of posters with differing views and you need them banned. You both have an intense need to thoroughly control all conversations. You both have difficulties with posting. You both hate Branner for not playing the role of your personal censor at the ready. You are both batshit crazy morons who spam this board out of uncontrollable temper tantrums. You were both chemistry students in New York and you both like the word "titration". You both believe that the primary "threat" to the planet is the methane and other gases being released from under the tundra as it melts. Not that any of it matters ... it's just a difference that I am not seeing.
20-03-2022 05:52
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	sealover wrote: There is a two-pronged approach to troll eradication. One is to simply by-pass them completely and go to a list of posts that includes none of theirs. You never have to see a word they say, and it starves them out. The second is just to drive them out with humiliation. When pain of humiliation exceeds joy of sadism, they reach a tipping point. Basically, your strategy is to troll-the-trolls, and obnoxiously derail any debate/discussion that doesn't meet with you approval. Some how, I've got a feeling, that May 1st, nothing happens, nothing changes, except your departure. Really don't see this site overrun by obnoxious chemistry geeks. Disruptive individuals, are usually banned individuals.
20-03-2022 06:37
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	As always nice work Harvey.We seem to be the only ones doing real world observations.The red flags go up when a new poster starts multiple threads and never ever answers simple questions and then the go fund me starts. Biogeochemistry is the scientific discipline that involves the study of the chemical, physical, geological, and biological processes and reactions that govern the composition of the natural environment (including the biosphere, the cryosphere, the hydrosphere, the pedosphere, the atmosphere, and the lithosphere). In particular, biogeochemistry is the study of biogeochemical cycles, the cycles of chemical elements such as carbon and nitrogen, and their interactions with and incorporation into living things transported through earth scale biological systems in space and time. The field focuses on chemical cycles which are either driven by or influence biological activity. Particular emphasis is placed on the study of carbon, nitrogen, sulfur, iron, and phosphorus cycles. Biogeochemistry is a systems science closely related to systems ecology. Straight copy and paste there team.Perhaps Sealover is promoting his field of interest.I have just spent an hour catching up on all the posts from 19th and the bulk of it is junk insults.Why? I will try one question at a time If Methane CH4 is natural gas how does it turn in to CO2 if it is not burned? Edited on 20-03-2022 06:38
RE: Methane to CO2 without "burning" GOOD QUESTION20-03-2022 06:56
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	"If methane is natural gas, how does it turn into CO2 without being burned" Thank you for a real question about biogeochemistry. Partly it is an opportunity to teach about microorganisms that turn methane into HCO3 and CO3. These guys, bicarbonate and carbonate are very close cousins to carbon dioxide. The big difference is that CO2 is slightly acidic, whereas HCO3 and CO3 provide the vast majority of alkalinity in the ocean. The best way to oxidize methane without oxygen is to use nitrate as the electron acceptor. This yields more energy than they could get using any other oxidant besides oxygen. The next best choice for a microorganism after nitrate might be selenate or arsenate or molydate or... The list is long of oxyanions in nature that can be used as oxidants by microorganisms. But the places in nature where you can find enough of them are rare. So, when the nitrate runs out, the next best oxidant is usually ferric iron or manganese(IV). Using ferric iron or manganese(IV) yields less energy than using nitrate to oxidize the methane. But it works. When the ferric iron or manganese(IV) run out, the next best choice is sulfate. Almost all these oxidants, when methane is used as reductant, yield ALKALINITY, rather than carbon dioxide as the oxidized carbon product. One thing that's cool about this is it means we can get energy by oxidizing our abundant supply of methane with something besides oxygen. Imagine a methane-powered power plant that instead of spewing out carbon dioxide, it is generating alkalinity for the sea. And we get to keep the energy. What sea? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- duncan61 wrote: As always nice work Harvey.We seem to be the only ones doing real world observations.The red flags go up when a new poster starts multiple threads and never ever answers simple questions and then the go fund me starts. Biogeochemistry is the scientific discipline that involves the study of the chemical, physical, geological, and biological processes and reactions that govern the composition of the natural environment (including the biosphere, the cryosphere, the hydrosphere, the pedosphere, the atmosphere, and the lithosphere). In particular, biogeochemistry is the study of biogeochemical cycles, the cycles of chemical elements such as carbon and nitrogen, and their interactions with and incorporation into living things transported through earth scale biological systems in space and time. The field focuses on chemical cycles which are either driven by or influence biological activity. Particular emphasis is placed on the study of carbon, nitrogen, sulfur, iron, and phosphorus cycles. Biogeochemistry is a systems science closely related to systems ecology. Straight copy and paste there team.Perhaps Sealover is promoting his field of interest.I have just spent an hour catching up on all the posts from 19th and the bulk of it is junk insults.Why? I will try one question at a time If Methane CH4 is natural gas how does it turn in to CO2 if it is not burned?
20-03-2022 07:17
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	Imagine a methane-powered power plant that instead of spewing out carbon dioxide, it is generating alkalinity for the sea. And we get to keep the energy. The Generators at Alcoa Wagerup are Natural gas turbines. They have been hooked into the grid and can be used when the load in Perth increases. I worked in the power house in 1980 during the construction phase and Later built the toilet block where the power lines were connected in to the existing lines coming from Collie. I feel burning coal to generate steam to spin a turbine is ancient tech but once running they can go for 50-60 years.I am not sure generating more Alkalinity is the correct way to describe. Making sea water more Alkaline is possibly a better term.I am curious to know where on the planet mans activities have made sea water less Alkaline on a large scale and what organisms have been affected. Lots of crayfish where I live. Using words like coral bleaching and ocean acidification infer something that is not true

RE: Any Website Rule against LIBEL?20-03-2022 07:27
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	The author of the post below published the following about myself: "You are a liar. You do not have ANY degree in chemistry." This is LIBEL. Is that not a good enough reason to ban a troll? Does the website have any legal liability if they fail to? There could be lawsuits involved. Especially when "sealover" finally gets doxed. Would the website be liable if they knew and failed to act? This is important enough to me that I won't wait for anyone to reply before I get the answer. Shouldn't be that hard to get contact info for someone who should care. IBdaMann wrote: sealover wrote:"What do you expect him to do? Ban trolls like you?" I am not seeing any difference between you and trafn. You both are 100% intolerant of posters with differing views and you need them banned. You both have an intense need to thoroughly control all conversations. You both have difficulties with posting. You both hate Branner for not playing the role of your personal censor at the ready. You are both batshit crazy morons who spam this board out of uncontrollable temper tantrums. You were both chemistry students in New York and you both like the word "titration". You both believe that the primary "threat" to the planet is the methane and other gases being released from under the tundra as it melts. Not that any of it matters ... it's just a difference that I am not seeing.
20-03-2022 07:59
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14416)	duncan61 wrote:Biogeochemistry is the scientific discipline that involves the study of the chemical, physical, geological, and biological processes and reactions that govern the composition of the natural environment (including the biosphere, the cryosphere, the hydrosphere, the pedosphere, the atmosphere, and the lithosphere). Nope. Chemistry is that. Chemistry is the science of all processes and reactions of matter. The lithosphere, the hydrosphere and the atmosphere are comprised of matter and their processes and reactions are governed by chemistry. There is no subset of chemistry that is also a broader science than just chemistry, i.e. there is no biogeophysiometamorphicaldynamicalchemistry. It's a made-up word to make Global Warming sound like science. sealover wrote:In particular, biogeochemistry is the study of biogeochemical cycles, the cycles of chemical elements such as carbon and nitrogen, and their interactions with and incorporation into living things transported through earth scale biological systems in space and time. Nope. You are describing organic chemistry, the subset of chemistry that deals with the matter of living things. Global Warming is trying to own that as well. sealover wrote:The field focuses on chemical cycles which are either driven by or influence biological activity. That is organic chemistry. There is no such thing as biographiologochemistry. sealover wrote:Particular emphasis is placed on the study of carbon, nitrogen, sulfur, iron, and phosphorus cycles. Your red flag should be that it is the study of CO2, and acid rain, and ocean acidification, and greenhouse effect, and "feedbacks" and all the crap that comprises Global Warming dogma. Why do you think seal over can't or won't define any of his terms? sealover wrote:Biogeochemistry is a systems science closely related to systems ecology. Really? A "systems" science? What do you believe that means, exactly? Is thermodynamics a "systems" science? sealover wrote: Straight copy and paste there team. I gathered that much. sealover wrote:Perhaps Sealover is promoting his field of interest.I have just spent an hour catching up on all the posts from 19th and the bulk of it is junk insults.Why? I'm glad you asked. seal over came to this site and immediately started lying. When he was politely corrected he went batshit crazy and so the gloves came off. It is not possible to hold any sort of discussion with him so I, for one, have given up. I tried helping but he immediately went into campaign to have me banned. I don't see any resolution but I'm open to suggestions.
20-03-2022 08:42
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	Stop being so rude would be a good start.I wish to find out why he believes all the stuff he does.I have made my position very clear.3 years of studying and I have zero evidence that AGW/CC is real.Every position taken by alarmists can be proved false however you have accused me of being a true believer of the church of global warming and having unprotected sex with people I have never met.Why?Ask questions of Sealover about real world events and not to define every term humans use.Its referred to as fossil fuel get over it.I know what it means and I am all that matters to me.Coal comes from ancient organic matter,job done do not try to deny it.Diamonds are coal that has been further compressed.That is not a religious veiw point it is how it is.
20-03-2022 09:13
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	sealover wrote: "If methane is natural gas, how does it turn into CO2 without being burned" Thank you for a real question about biogeochemistry. Buzzword fallacy. sealover wrote: Partly it is an opportunity to teach about microorganisms that turn methane into HCO3 and CO3. No such chemical. sealover wrote: These guys, bicarbonate and carbonate are very close cousins to carbon dioxide. No. There is no such chemical as 'bicarbonate' or 'carbonate'. sealover wrote: The big difference is that CO2 is slightly acidic, CO2 is not acidic. It is not an acid. sealover wrote: whereas HCO3 and CO3 provide the vast majority of alkalinity in the ocean. No such chemicals. sealover wrote: The best way to oxidize methane without oxygen is to use nitrate as the electron acceptor. ...deleted remaining random wanderings and buzzwords... Nitrate has oxygen. I guess you forgot about that, didn't ya? The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
20-03-2022 09:28
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	sealover wrote: The author of the post below published the following about myself: "You are a liar. You do not have ANY degree in chemistry." This is LIBEL. No, it isn't. That is not possible on a blind forum such as this one. sealover wrote: Is that not a good enough reason to ban a troll? You are asking to be banned again? sealover wrote: Does the website have any legal liability if they fail to? No. sealover wrote: There could be lawsuits involved. Against who? You would lose such a lawsuit. sealover wrote: Especially when "sealover" finally gets doxed. Why would you be? Are you violating the rules of the forum? sealover wrote: Would the website be liable if they knew and failed to act? No. See the CFR, Title 47, $230. sealover wrote: This is important enough to me that I won't wait for anyone to reply before I get the answer. Shouldn't be that hard to get contact info for someone who should care. If you want to file a frivolous lawsuit against an unnamed defendant, and claim the forum is responsible, you are free to waste your money before it gets thrown out and possible criminal charges are applied against you, not to mention possible civil countersuits filed against you. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
20-03-2022 09:48
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	duncan61 wrote: Stop being so rude would be a good start.I wish to find out why he believes all the stuff he does. I have already answered this question. He is a clueless individual that is so insignificant in his own mind that he tries to puff himself up with claims of credentials, using buzzwords, tries to techno-babble his way through life to sound impressive, and tries to sound like a threat to anyone that disagrees with him. He's a sad case. Of course, he has also fallen in with the Church of Global Warming. He lies to himself, he lies about being part of science (he denies science), he lies about being a chemist, and he lies about being a 'qualified expert'. He is a nothing, trying to sound impressive. duncan61 wrote: I have made my position very clear.3 years of studying and I have zero evidence that AGW/CC is real.Every position taken by alarmists can be proved false however you have accused me of being a true believer of the church of global warming and having unprotected sex with people I have never met.Why? Because you still believe that CO2 has some magick capability to warm the Earth. duncan61 wrote: Ask questions of Sealover about real world events and not to define every term humans use. Sealover doesn't want to discuss real world anything. He wants to couch himself in buzzwords. No one is asking him to define every word in the English language. You are hallucinating. duncan61 wrote: Its referred to as fossil fuel get over it. Fossils don't burn. They are not used as fuel. Coal is not a fossil. It is carbon. Oil is not a fossil. It is a hydrocarbon. Methane is not a fossil. It is a hydrocarbon. Both oil and methane are renewable fuels. Coal is unknown, but plentiful. duncan61 wrote: I know what it means and I am all that matters to me. If you want to keep deluding yourself that coal, oil, or methane are fossils, then you are simply insisting on remaining in ignorance. duncan61 wrote: Coal comes from ancient organic matter, job done do not try to deny it. The origin of coal is unknown. Carbon is not organic. duncan61 wrote: Diamonds are coal that has been further compressed. Nope. They are simply another form of carbon. So is graphite. Carbon forms several different combinations with itself. duncan61 wrote: That is not a religious veiw point it is how it is. It is a religious viewpoint. Don't try to lie your way out of it. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
20-03-2022 21:57
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14416)	duncan61 wrote:Stop being so rude would be a good start. Perhaps you missed the part of my post where I mentioned that being polite wasn't getting anywhere and that I had "given up." I'd be interested to know why you are somehow blaming me for your inability to get seal over to be honest with you in any way. Maybe this wasn't explained to you fully but if you don't like what I write in a post, you can skip it. If you don't like what I write in a post to someone else, well then blow me. It wasn't intended for you in the first place so stop crying like a fuqqing baby. Perhaps you might prefer a forum designed for children. Do you have any meaningful suggestions to get seal over to stop being the overbearing troll that he obviously is? If you do, start by putting them into action. You have already asked him several questions. Are you satisfied with his answers? Ask him to define his terms ... or not. Are you looking for coherent t answers or are you satisfied with gibberish? Do you care whether he is lying to you? To what extent do you care? Like I said, I have tried to discuss science and math but seal over simply goes ape-schytt over there being "deniers" on the same forum that will recognize his crap for what it is. It does not matter how polite I am. All that matters to him is that I do not worship as he does so he is in full-out attack mode. So, I'll ask you again, do you have any meaningful suggestions? If so, I'm all ears. If not, STFU. duncan61 wrote: I wish to find out why he believes all the stuff he does. You have your answer. He is a devoted warmizombie who is totally intolerant of even minutely differing views. There is no "why" that he will explain to you or to anyone else. Both seal over and tmiddles are warmizombies and are supposedly on the same side of the fence, yet seal over won't answer any of tmiddles' questions that dig into differences between their respective faiths. Try asking seal over directly with altar boy politeness: "Why do you believe that there is such a thing as a greenhouse gas that has the magical superpower to increase the earth's average global temperature in a way that seemingly violates the first and second laws of thermodynamics as well as Stefan-Boltzmann?" If you can get him to answer that, you'll have the full big-picture answer you seek. Good luck. duncan61 wrote:I have made my position very clear. Exactly. You have made it clear that your position differs from his. Therefore, you are not his choir and he will treat you, at a minimum, with suspicion and scorn. Your position is incompatible with his total intolerance so you will not get anywhere. But by all means, keep trying to your heart's content. Good luck. duncan61 wrote:3 years of studying and I have zero evidence that AGW/CC is real. Do you have any evidence you can present that Ganesh is real? Does that matter to a devoted Hindu? duncan61 wrote:Every position taken by alarmists can be proved false however you have accused me of being a true believer of the church of global warming ... Because you are, and on this topic you are a totally dishonest fuq. It is totally impossible to have a polite, honest discussion with you because your devotion to this religion precludes you from honestly addressing science and math that shows that you are objectively mistaken. So once again, on this topic you are a totally dishonest dumbass. You are as dishonest as seal over is. The fact that you feel the need to denigrate me over your blatant dishonesty tells me that you me to further remind you of your total lack of education, your inability to communicate in English, your rampant gullibility that has you believing every wild physics violation that comes your way while fighting with everyone who tries to help you. It's like you are begging for a big Fuuck You! OK. Fuuck You. You are the dishonest fuuck. If you ever want to HONESTLY discuss science then let me know otherwise you are a science denier who believes that CO2 can defy physics ... and you believe it because you were told to believe it ... because you don't do a whole lot of thinking for yourself. Remember, anytime you need me to remind you just how much of a dishonest fuuck you are, don't hesitate to let me know. duncan61 wrote: ... and having unprotected sex with people I have never met. The extent to which you allow others to bend you over furniture speaks volumes. Start thinking for yourself and you might be able to start being honest for a change. Remember, if you EVER need me to remind you of your total gullibility, just say the word. duncan61 wrote:Why?Ask questions of Sealover about real world events and not to define every term humans use. It sounds like you are in need of being reminded just how stupid and dishonest you are. OK. Duncan, you aspire to be as bright as a tar pit. seal over spews incomprehensible gibber-babble. He hides behind buzzwords. Are you going to explain what he means by his terms? Are you? If not, STFU and let me ask him WTF he means. Just because YOU are a gullible vegetable who becomes mesmerized by every buzzword that he doesn't understand and rushes to believe whatever religion is thrown at him ... doesn't somehow help me understand WTF seal over is saying. So, I'll ask you again, are YOU going to provide unambiguous definitions for seal over's terms? Are you? If not, are you suggesting maybe I ask seal over directly? But wait, you are bitching and whining that I am asking seal over to explain the terms he is using. You aren't providing any answers. I guess it's time for another Fuuck You. ... or are you telling me that I don't get to ask questions? I am standing by for an answer on this one. I've got another big Fuuck You ready. Give me an answer. duncan61 wrote: Its referred to as fossil fuel get over it. You're totally brain dead. Try to get over it. I don't recall anyone requiring you to demonstrate any minimum level of intelligence. You're a total dumbfuuck but everyone welcomes you to post here. Do you see how that works? Everybody gets to ask questions, even you. duncan61 wrote:I know what it means No you don't. You think you do but you don't, and you won't accept any help on the matter because you take pride in being stupid. It's a strange thing to take pride in. duncan61 wrote: Coal comes from ancient organic matter, Did you notice how you had to pivot right there? I have always spoken of hydrocarbons and specifically excluded coal. You are the one who can't even spell "hydrocarbons" and here you are believing that it is coal, and just after claiming that you know what "fossil fuels" means. You are an idiot. Get over it. duncan61 wrote: Diamonds are coal that has been further compressed. Diamonds are not hydrocarbons. I shouldn't need to be teaching you this. duncan61 wrote: That is not a religious veiw point it is how it is. So go over it with me. Explain to me "how it is." How are hydrocarbons formed from fossils? Cheers, mate.
RE: Why Sponsor this? A Model for Troll-free Discussion20-03-2022 22:17
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	Why would anyone want to donate to some kind of fund-raising effort to enable troll-infested websites to become places of meaningful discussion? Free from the constant heckling and bullying of Internet trolls? What if all that was needed was presentation of a novel model for intrasite communication in unmoderated forums? What if the infrastructure is already in place, and all we have to do is rethink how to make best use of it? What if members of a site such as this one established a network of communication that enables them to view each other's posts without ever having to see the uninvited comments from those who seek only to disrupt? Couldn't members simply view each other individual listings of posts to communicate without risks of seeing multiple pages of disgusting evil clown images, along with the message "Be afraid. Be very very afraid."? Wouldn't it be nice to get a meaningful response to a post without having to sift through pages of demands for unambiguous definitions, listings of "fallacies", and accusations of treason? Wouldn't it be nice to learn what others thought our posts without a team of mentally-ill losers constantly trying to bait them into gang rape ambush with insults, accusations, and outrageous claims that they know a decent person would feel compelled to challenge? The infrastructure is already there. There has got to be a way to take back control of the asylum. Why would someone want to donate money to such an effort? What if someone proved first that it really can be done, to convince sponsors that such an effort has true payoff? What if a troll-infested hellhole were to suddenly transform into a world class discussion site for ACTUAL SCIENCE needed to inform any "climate debate"? Or maybe a new TV show called "Website Rescue", where a skilled team moves in to turn the place around overnight? There has got to be a way... the member
20-03-2022 22:43
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14416)	seal over wrote:What if a troll-infested hellhole were to suddenly transform into a world class discussion site for ACTUAL SCIENCE needed to inform any "climate debate"? They might be inclined to ask you to leave, but that's not how we operate here. seal over wrote:Or maybe a new TV show called "Website Rescue", where a skilled team moves in and makes seal over "disappear" Again, that's not how we operate here. seal over wrote:There has got to be a way... Maybe you'll go away on your own. Maybe you'll just decide to be honest. Maybe you'll start to define your terms. Maybe you'll admit that you only intend to preach religious dogma. There are many options besides banning you. We'll hold out for one of those. .
RE: Perfect Name for Bait: "climate-debate.com"21-03-2022 00:21
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	Perfect Name for Bait: "climate-debate.com". Let's imagine I want to create a website where I can lure in unsuspecting tree huggers, hippies, democrats, Communists, and false scientists who refuse to unambiguously define their terms, use buzzwords, employ fallacies, and just LIE ALL THE TIME. Would a name like wehatescience.com do the job? Would a name like wedontcareaboutthefuture.com do the job? Would a name like wedenyreality.com do the job? Would a name like wejustwanttohurtsomebody.com do the job? Maybe not. What about a name like climate-debate.com? Those fools will come here thinking they will meet someone who gives a shit about climate! Here comes one now! Are you guys ready to pounce? Bwah ha ha ha ha! It is the PERFECT website name for bait --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IBdaMann wrote: There are many options besides banning you. We'll hold out for one of those. .
RE: I can set my clock to it. You all log on at once.21-03-2022 00:30
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	I can set my clock to it. You all log on at once. One minute there are only four guests. Within two minutes there are over a hundred. TALK ABOUT GANG RAPE AMBUSH!
21-03-2022 01:16
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	sealover wrote: Perfect Name for Bait: "climate-debate.com". Let's imagine I want to create a website where I can lure in unsuspecting tree huggers, hippies, democrats, Communists, and false scientists who refuse to unambiguously define their terms, use buzzwords, employ fallacies, and just LIE ALL THE TIME. Would a name like wehatescience.com do the job? Would a name like wedontcareaboutthefuture.com do the job? Would a name like wedenyreality.com do the job? Would a name like wejustwanttohurtsomebody.com do the job? Maybe not. What about a name like climate-debate.com? Those fools will come here thinking they will meet someone who gives a shit about climate! Here comes one now! Are you guys ready to pounce? Bwah ha ha ha ha! It is the PERFECT website name for bait --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IBdaMann wrote: There are many options besides banning you. We'll hold out for one of those. . Do you understand what a debate is? There are at least two sides to every issue, each argue their case, as to why the believe as they do. Obviously your team is a little weak, with just faith to hold them up. Most realize that, and leave in shame. If Climate Change were true, factual, there would be little to debate. It wouldn't take decades for hard marketing to sell. Twiddles summed it pretty good, though not exactly what he intended. Basically, he claimed it wasn't the few degrees warming that were bad, but how rapidly. The hype, hysteria, the push for fast, and absolute changes to our energy use is going to cause a lot of death, destruction, and catastrophes as well. You can't just flip the 'green' switch in a few years, and everything will change over instantly, smoothly.
21-03-2022 02:01
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	sealover wrote: Why would anyone want to donate to some kind of fund-raising effort to enable troll-infested websites to become places of meaningful discussion? ...deleted excess... Trolling. Spamming. No argument presented. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
21-03-2022 02:02
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	sealover wrote: Perfect Name for Bait: "climate-debate.com". Let's imagine I want to create a website where I can lure in unsuspecting tree huggers, hippies, democrats, Communists, and false scientists who refuse to unambiguously define their terms, use buzzwords, employ fallacies, and just LIE ALL THE TIME. ...deleted excess... Trolling. Spamming. No argument presented. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
21-03-2022 02:03
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	sealover wrote: I can set my clock to it. You all log on at once. One minute there are only four guests. Within two minutes there are over a hundred. TALK ABOUT GANG RAPE AMBUSH! Paranoia. Trolling. No argument presented. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan

RE: "sealover" is not my real name21-03-2022 04:19
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	Greetings friends. I have been gathering ammunition for maybe a month now. The trolls have been most gracious. They have provided me with a gold mine of quotes to use in science lessons. They have provided me with a deep look into their twisted minds. Ammunition galore! My goal is to share it in a vermin-infested website troll eradication program manual that I hope can be used by as many others as possible. "sealover" is not my real name. My friends call me Dr. Dirt. My enemies call me Dr. Trollslayer. Into the Night wrote: sealover wrote: I can set my clock to it. You all log on at once. One minute there are only four guests. Within two minutes there are over a hundred. TALK ABOUT GANG RAPE AMBUSH! Paranoia. Trolling. No argument presented.
RE: Basically, your strategy is to troll the trolls.21-03-2022 04:40
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	"So, basically your strategy is to troll-the-trolls, and obnoxiously derail any debate/discussion that doesn't meet with you approval." Congratulations! You actually just gained esteem in my opinion. Turns out Mr. Trump fan isn't half as stupid as I thought! Yep. I'm going to FORCE them to post on my thread. How vicious is that? I must be some kind of sadist. ------------------------------------------------------------ HarveyH55 wrote: sealover wrote: There is a two-pronged approach to troll eradication. One is to simply by-pass them completely and go to a list of posts that includes none of theirs. You never have to see a word they say, and it starves them out. The second is just to drive them out with humiliation. When pain of humiliation exceeds joy of sadism, they reach a tipping point. Basically, your strategy is to troll-the-trolls, and obnoxiously derail any debate/discussion that doesn't meet with you approval. Some how, I've got a feeling, that May 1st, nothing happens, nothing changes, except your departure. Really don't see this site overrun by obnoxious chemistry geeks. Disruptive individuals, are usually banned individuals.
RE: Trolling. Spamming. No argument presented.21-03-2022 04:54
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	"Trolling. Spamming. No argument presented." I disagree with your characterization of my science lessons. But there something familiar about the trio of terms in the criticism.. Who does that kind of thing, anyway? -------------------------------------------------------- Into the Night wrote: sealover wrote: Perfect Name for Bait: "climate-debate.com". Let's imagine I want to create a website where I can lure in unsuspecting tree huggers, hippies, democrats, Communists, and false scientists who refuse to unambiguously define their terms, use buzzwords, employ fallacies, and just LIE ALL THE TIME. ...deleted excess... Trolling. Spamming. No argument presented.
21-03-2022 08:11
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	sealover wrote: Greetings friends. I have been gathering ammunition for maybe a month now. The trolls have been most gracious. They have provided me with a gold mine of quotes to use in science lessons. They have provided me with a deep look into their twisted minds. Ammunition galore! My goal is to share it in a vermin-infested website troll eradication program manual that I hope can be used by as many others as possible. "sealover" is not my real name. My friends call me Dr. Dirt. My enemies call me Dr. Trollslayer. Into the Night wrote: sealover wrote: I can set my clock to it. You all log on at once. One minute there are only four guests. Within two minutes there are over a hundred. TALK ABOUT GANG RAPE AMBUSH! Paranoia. Trolling. No argument presented. Spamming. Trolling. No argument presented. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
21-03-2022 08:12
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	sealover wrote: "So, basically your strategy is to troll-the-trolls, and obnoxiously derail any debate/discussion that doesn't meet with you approval." Congratulations! You actually just gained esteem in my opinion. Turns out Mr. Trump fan isn't half as stupid as I thought! Yep. I'm going to FORCE them to post on my thread. How vicious is that? I must be some kind of sadist. Trolling. No argument presented. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
21-03-2022 08:14
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	sealover wrote: "Trolling. Spamming. No argument presented." I disagree with your characterization of my science lessons. You aren't giving science lessons. You are just spewing buzzword and denying science and math. sealover wrote: But there something familiar about the trio of terms in the criticism.. Who does that kind of thing, anyway? RQAA. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
21-03-2022 10:50
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	Coal is formed when dead plant matter submerged in swamp environments is subjected to the geological forces of heat and pressure over hundreds of millions of years. Over time, the plant matter transforms from moist, low-carbon peat, to coal, an energy- and carbon-dense black or brownish-black sedimentary rock.15 Dec 2017.So this is a work of fiction?Seems to make sense to me and there is oil and other stuff like gas and humans drill down and get it out the ground and refine it or is this all not true?Its called fossil fuel and I do not agree burning it is a big issue however the CO2 released from burning all this fuel has changed the atmosphere a tiny little bit. Amounts unknown. Why is that so hard to get your head around. Declaring NO GAS OR VAPOUR CAN WARM THE EARTH.Is inferring the gas is doing the work. The sun is an uncontrolled heat source in plumbing design and in real world events. The Atmosphere makes our weather and planet the way it is.Change the Atmosphere the weather changes but it can not be measured or calculated and is doing sweet F all in the big picture.The alarmist are falling for the B.S.Its going to cook us all unless we stop it now.Germany of all places just failed the renewable pathway big time even bigger than Texas did and thats big LOL
RE: first time I noticed this - Honesty equals loyalty.21-03-2022 11:24
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	This is the first time I started looking at some of the intraparty dymanics. Looks like a very unequal distribution of power in the relationships. Looks like "loyalty" requires absolute "honesty" In other words if you don't back up my lie, you're a liar AND a traitor. Well, I guess it keeps these guys off the street. We're having a science vote at the club. If you don't take my side, to back up my truth, I'm gonna be pissed. Well, I guess it keeps these guys off the streets. Seriously, imagine the harm they might be doing out there if they were. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IBdaMann wrote: duncan61 wrote:Stop being so rude would be a good start. Perhaps you missed the part of my post where I mentioned that being polite wasn't getting anywhere and that I had "given up." I'd be interested to know why you are somehow blaming me for your inability to get seal over to be honest with you in any way. Maybe this wasn't explained to you fully but if you don't like what I write in a post, you can skip it. If you don't like what I write in a post to someone else, well then blow me. It wasn't intended for you in the first place so stop crying like a fuqqing baby. Perhaps you might prefer a forum designed for children. Do you have any meaningful suggestions to get seal over to stop being the overbearing troll that he obviously is? If you do, start by putting them into action. You have already asked him several questions. Are you satisfied with his answers? Ask him to define his terms ... or not. Are you looking for coherent t answers or are you satisfied with gibberish? Do you care whether he is lying to you? To what extent do you care? Like I said, I have tried to discuss science and math but seal over simply goes ape-schytt over there being "deniers" on the same forum that will recognize his crap for what it is. It does not matter how polite I am. All that matters to him is that I do not worship as he does so he is in full-out attack mode. So, I'll ask you again, do you have any meaningful suggestions? If so, I'm all ears. If not, STFU. duncan61 wrote: I wish to find out why he believes all the stuff he does. You have your answer. He is a devoted warmizombie who is totally intolerant of even minutely differing views. There is no "why" that he will explain to you or to anyone else. Both seal over and tmiddles are warmizombies and are supposedly on the same side of the fence, yet seal over won't answer any of tmiddles' questions that dig into differences between their respective faiths. Try asking seal over directly with altar boy politeness: "Why do you believe that there is such a thing as a greenhouse gas that has the magical superpower to increase the earth's average global temperature in a way that seemingly violates the first and second laws of thermodynamics as well as Stefan-Boltzmann?" If you can get him to answer that, you'll have the full big-picture answer you seek. Good luck. duncan61 wrote:I have made my position very clear. Exactly. You have made it clear that your position differs from his. Therefore, you are not his choir and he will treat you, at a minimum, with suspicion and scorn. Your position is incompatible with his total intolerance so you will not get anywhere. But by all means, keep trying to your heart's content. Good luck. duncan61 wrote:3 years of studying and I have zero evidence that AGW/CC is real. Do you have any evidence you can present that Ganesh is real? Does that matter to a devoted Hindu? duncan61 wrote:Every position taken by alarmists can be proved false however you have accused me of being a true believer of the church of global warming ... Because you are, and on this topic you are a totally dishonest fuq. It is totally impossible to have a polite, honest discussion with you because your devotion to this religion precludes you from honestly addressing science and math that shows that you are objectively mistaken. So once again, on this topic you are a totally dishonest dumbass. You are as dishonest as seal over is. The fact that you feel the need to denigrate me over your blatant dishonesty tells me that you me to further remind you of your total lack of education, your inability to communicate in English, your rampant gullibility that has you believing every wild physics violation that comes your way while fighting with everyone who tries to help you. It's like you are begging for a big Fuuck You! OK. Fuuck You. You are the dishonest fuuck. If you ever want to HONESTLY discuss science then let me know otherwise you are a science denier who believes that CO2 can defy physics ... and you believe it because you were told to believe it ... because you don't do a whole lot of thinking for yourself. Remember, anytime you need me to remind you just how much of a dishonest fuuck you are, don't hesitate to let me know. duncan61 wrote: ... and having unprotected sex with people I have never met. The extent to which you allow others to bend you over furniture speaks volumes. Start thinking for yourself and you might be able to start being honest for a change. Remember, if you EVER need me to remind you of your total gullibility, just say the word. duncan61 wrote:Why?Ask questions of Sealover about real world events and not to define every term humans use. It sounds like you are in need of being reminded just how stupid and dishonest you are. OK. Duncan, you aspire to be as bright as a tar pit. seal over spews incomprehensible gibber-babble. He hides behind buzzwords. Are you going to explain what he means by his terms? Are you? If not, STFU and let me ask him WTF he means. Just because YOU are a gullible vegetable who becomes mesmerized by every buzzword that he doesn't understand and rushes to believe whatever religion is thrown at him ... doesn't somehow help me understand WTF seal over is saying. So, I'll ask you again, are YOU going to provide unambiguous definitions for seal over's terms? Are you? If not, are you suggesting maybe I ask seal over directly? But wait, you are bitching and whining that I am asking seal over to explain the terms he is using. You aren't providing any answers. I guess it's time for another Fuuck You. ... or are you telling me that I don't get to ask questions? I am standing by for an answer on this one. I've got another big Fuuck You ready. Give me an answer. duncan61 wrote: Its referred to as fossil fuel get over it. You're totally brain dead. Try to get over it. I don't recall anyone requiring you to demonstrate any minimum level of intelligence. You're a total dumbfuuck but everyone welcomes you to post here. Do you see how that works? Everybody gets to ask questions, even you. duncan61 wrote:I know what it means No you don't. You think you do but you don't, and you won't accept any help on the matter because you take pride in being stupid. It's a strange thing to take pride in. duncan61 wrote: Coal comes from ancient organic matter, Did you notice how you had to pivot right there? I have always spoken of hydrocarbons and specifically excluded coal. You are the one who can't even spell "hydrocarbons" and here you are believing that it is coal, and just after claiming that you know what "fossil fuels" means. You are an idiot. Get over it. duncan61 wrote: Diamonds are coal that has been further compressed. Diamonds are not hydrocarbons. I shouldn't need to be teaching you this. duncan61 wrote: That is not a religious veiw point it is how it is. So go over it with me. Explain to me "how it is." How are hydrocarbons formed from fossils? Cheers, mate.
RE: All we asked for was the Kiddie pool21-03-2022 11:35
sealover ★★★★☆ (1249)	All we asked for was the Kiddie pool but you stupid pieces of shit refused. Your sacrosanct entitle to troll every one of my posts. Such trollings were required to put a check to my offenses against science. I didn't want to have be be a **ing trollslayer. I just wanted to post science lessons. You just refused to stop disrupting class. So now I'm going to get my revenge every chance I get. You don't seem to be aware how pathetically vulnerable you are to public humiliation at this point. Believe me, this plot will have a twist. You couldn't let us have the kiddie pool. I guess we just have to drive you ignorant s out of here. It will be remarkably easy to do. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Into the Night wrote: sealover wrote: "Trolling. Spamming. No argument presented." I disagree with your characterization of my science lessons. You aren't giving science lessons. You are just spewing buzzword and denying science and math. sealover wrote:** But there something familiar about the trio of terms in the criticism.. Who does that kind of thing, anyway? RQAA.
21-03-2022 11:45
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	The bulk of what ITN and IBDM post is good stuff they are just hung up on being right.I am still capable of learning anything new.My goal is to have the answers to the AGW/CC claims.As I have said I am very certain nothing is happening thats bad in the way described.Where I live we had 13 days over 40.c this summer and no one died from it.England has very cold winters and thousands of people die from it

Page 1 of 2

Join the debate Go Fund Me pitch for troll-infested website vermin eradication program manual:

Threads	Replies	Last post
This Website Needs an Edit Function	7	20-02-2024 03:50
Troll Songs and Quote identification contest	60	11-01-2024 04:10
Definition of a Troll	56	27-11-2023 13:07
A conservative website that gets it wrong about Global Warming	3	20-06-2023 19:34
AI banned from nuclear launch decisions, after Google creates self-aware computer program	1	29-04-2023 20:43